From owner-freebsd-current Tue Jan 9 04:12:19 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id EAA04803 for current-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 04:12:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from DATAPLEX.NET (SHARK.DATAPLEX.NET [199.183.109.241]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA04794 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 04:12:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [199.183.109.242] by DATAPLEX.NET with SMTP (MailShare 1.0fc5); Tue, 9 Jan 1996 06:12:15 -0600 X-Sender: rkw@shark.dataplex.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 06:11:56 -0600 To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" From: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) Subject: Re: Syncing CTM and SNAPS? Cc: current@freebsd.org, phk@freebsd.org Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >What do you think? If you make a SNAP based on any ctm source, then it is unnecessary to distribute the source distributions as a part of the SNAP. In fact, this idea could be extended to the regular release distributions. The only problem is that the CTM distribution is the total system source. I presume that there are those who do not have the disk space for that and want only a subset instead. The current CTM mechanism does not handle that situation. ---- Richard Wackerbarth rkw@dataplex.net